Student strike for climate change
Discussion
Slagathore said:
That's what you know. Not necessarily what the brainwashed kids know.
And? None of that is hard to find. Infact much of it is used by her opponents to question her green credentials.Slagathore said:
I'd actually support the voting age being upped to 21.
I agree. Let's raise the voting age to 21, remove income tax for those under 21, and remove voting rights from those at the state retirement age. But also remove income tax on those that choose to work beyond the state retirement age.Slagathore said:
Now bear in mind lots of kids live on social media, it's no coincidence there's a link between mental health issues and social media use. Imagine them being able to vote and how easy it would be influence them with advertising and propaganda.
I seem to remember 15 years ago the same parts of society said that video games made children into violent psychopaths too. When I was of school age I had to walk to school and if I wanted to get anywhere it was the bus or my bike and we didn't fly off to foreign lands every school holiday. Added to this in a family house of 7 we had one dustbin so didn't have a mountain of plastic covering every possible item that comes into a home these days. So forgive me for not feeling responsible for climate change I strongly suspect that most of these kids have a far more dangerous Carbon footprint etc now than I will contribute for my entire time on this planet
That's what you know, so by all means bring it up and discuss it. The point I'm making is that I bet none of those kids protesting know that!
https://www.harvardmagazine.com/2008/09/the-teen-b...
Paragraph 5 in particular.
It is scientific fact, and I'd imagine it's the basis for setting age limits for drinking, driving, voting etc.
Now, if the science is telling us these kids haven't matured emotionally or mentally, and we know they're still developing, why would you think they were capable of voting?
Unless of course you want a massive demographic that will be easy to manipulate.
https://www.harvardmagazine.com/2008/09/the-teen-b...
Paragraph 5 in particular.
It is scientific fact, and I'd imagine it's the basis for setting age limits for drinking, driving, voting etc.
Now, if the science is telling us these kids haven't matured emotionally or mentally, and we know they're still developing, why would you think they were capable of voting?
Unless of course you want a massive demographic that will be easy to manipulate.
Evanivitch said:
Joining the army at 16 means you cannot leave until you are 22 years old except under extreme circumstances (I don't like it isn't a valid excuse)..
You're confusing what they're allowed to be sold with what they are allowed to do.
There is no law that makes it illegal for them to drink, smoke, hold a knife, use a private tanning bed, watch a violent film, watch pornography, use a shotgun or fire a legal firearm at the age of 16.
But claiming that we expect 16 year olds to die for our country is simply untrue. The reason there aren't laws around that are not only that they would be unenforceable or impractical (plenty of legit reasons why someone under 18 could use a knife), but the presumption is that there will be a responsible adult to supervise their use. In the eyes of the law, someone under 18 is not seen as mature or trustworthy enough to make that decision, and in some cases it can be the adult or company that allowed it who is prosecuted.You're confusing what they're allowed to be sold with what they are allowed to do.
There is no law that makes it illegal for them to drink, smoke, hold a knife, use a private tanning bed, watch a violent film, watch pornography, use a shotgun or fire a legal firearm at the age of 16.
Slagathore said:
Now, if the science is telling us these kids haven't matured emotionally or mentally, and we know they're still developing, why would you think they were capable of voting?
Unless of course you want a massive demographic that will be easy to manipulate.
Because we also allow people in mental decline to continue to vote, and people that never have or never will be emotionally or mentally mature.Unless of course you want a massive demographic that will be easy to manipulate.
Do you think it's acceptable that you can pay income tax but have no influence on how that tax is spent?
Evanivitch said:
Because we also allow people in mental decline to continue to vote, and people that never have or never will be emotionally or mentally mature.
Do you think it's acceptable that you can pay income tax but have no influence on how that tax is spent?
Lets assume you're average pensioner starts to lose it about at 70, they've still had 50 years of voting while with it.Do you think it's acceptable that you can pay income tax but have no influence on how that tax is spent?
You can see where this argument is going. Maybe we should have voting only for those with an IQ over 100? Or only a vote if you are employed?
At 18, you are considered an adult and get the right to vote. That is just about as fair as it can be. If you go down the path of the above, you'd lose most of the electorate.
I do think that's acceptable, because if they continue to work, in 2 years, once they legally become an adult, they can then vote. Plus, realistically, how much tax are they paying? The tax free amount is nearly £12k, so their part time job on min wage is probably all tax free anyway.
Even if they start an apprenticeship and are working more, they'll still not be earning a huge amount. If they leave school and work full time, that is their decision, the free education was there for them to use if they wanted it.
But also, they've had 16 years of using tax funded services, so their starting point is already that they're in the negative on contributions. How many people are actually net contributors? Should their vote count more because they don't cost the taxpayer any money and they're in a surplus?
Just because you pay tax, it doesn't make you special. It just means you are paying in to a system that you'll more than likely take more from.
Slagathore said:
Lets assume you're average pensioner starts to lose it about at 70, they've still had 50 years of voting while with it.
You can see where this argument is going. Maybe we should have voting only for those with an IQ over 100? Or only a vote if you are e
E
A friend of mine is 81 he sailed a 36 ft yacht back from Crete single handed last year where in Gods name did you get the idea Pensioners start to lose it at 70. My next Door neighbour is 71 next month he is just finishing building his house.Mind you Corbyn is 70 soon and McDonald toYou can see where this argument is going. Maybe we should have voting only for those with an IQ over 100? Or only a vote if you are e
E
johnxjsc1985 said:
A friend of mine is 81 he sailed a 36 ft yacht back from Crete single handed last year where in Gods name did you get the idea Pensioners start to lose it at 70. My next Door neighbour is 71 next month he is just finishing building his house.Mind you Corbyn is 70 soon and McDonald to
I don't actually believe that. I was just using it as an example.johnxjsc1985 said:
You actually condemned 90% of the House of Lords so maybe you have a point
Ha. Age is a tough one. I do hear some of the stuff the really old MPs talk about in parliament and it's all a bit outdated and not particularly relevant, but then I think they've got the experience and know far more than I probably will.
b
hstewie said:
hstewie said:Lentilist said:
Who says a lot of these kids aren't going vegan? There's been a significant increase in veganism in the UK in recent year, and I don't think it's unreasonable to state it's not the PH demographic driving it. Plenty of people making lifestyle changes due to environmental concerns, yet this place generally has a ready made put down or pithy remark as to why it's pointless and/or stupid, and why anyone voicing such concerns is uneducated and/or has been brainwashed by whoever is the political bogeyman du jour of this parish (EU, Corbyn, IPCC etc.), and none of it matters anyway because China. Also curious how protest and direct action by students is deemed useless and a political stunt, and they're all just a bunch of moaners who should sort their own probelms out, yet stick a yellow vest on a protester and this place faps itself into revolutionary fervour about the overthrow of the political establishment.
Ouch! So true.
Some posters seem to live in a fantasy land where they claim to know all sorts of stuff about what other people do or think, or what they would "probably" do in some hypothetical situation.turbobloke said:
irocfan said:
Slagathore said:
Weaponising kids to push your agenda, nice.
indeed - something that the nazis and soviets were very keen on. If teachers are being overtly political (right or left) as part of their classes they should be sacked
/picsomitted
As it's against the rules to display partisan material in a polling station, the police were called. The presiding officer then told the school's site manager to cover up the posters...which isn't the point, their creation and display is the point.
Indoctrination is nothing new in primary schools, less common in secondaries. I've spent a lot of time on-site working with charitable education trusts and see this type of partisan 'teaching' frequently. It's only ever one-way (see above) and primary schools in particular are full of emotive climate hype.
Perhaps not as common as you're making it sound, but I've been confronted by students who have been told biased information from non-science teachers, regarding climate change.
It's actually quite difficult to avoid (forcing your views on others as a teacher). It's common for me to hold back students who refer to football teams they support as 'us' or 'we', whilst letting those who dislike the sport go first. Fortunately the AQA science syllabus is quite easy to adhere to, so with delivering science, it's easy to stay on topic and not get involved in pointless conversations outside of the curriculum.
It could be worse. Climate indoctrination is over the top down under.
Climate change indoctrination is rampant among our educators
https://www.spectator.co.uk/2018/08/suffer-your-ch...
Memo to Dr Sara Arthur: Malcolm McCulloch of the University of Western Australia in Perth (and his colleagues) put boxes around corals at Heron Island on the Great Barrier Reef and bubbled carbon dioxide into them, increasing acidity. Those corals were unaffected in a simulation of the acidity expected by 2100. Not that it will arrive, like the many dozens of prior failed predictions that make global warming soothsayers a laughing stock. Andreas Andersson of the Scripps Institution of Oceanography in San Diego, California, and his colleagues carefully monitored a coral reef in Bermuda for five years, and found that spikes in acidity were linked to increased reef growth. “At first we were really puzzled by this,” says Andersson. “It’s completely the opposite to what we would expect in an ocean-acidification scenario.” Phytoplankton blooms were washing in and feeding the corals, resulting in a higher growth rate and greater acidity levels in the water around the reef. Thriving, growing corals 'adidify' (make slightly less alkaline) the water around them.
Climate change indoctrination is rampant among our educators
https://www.spectator.co.uk/2018/08/suffer-your-ch...
Memo to Dr Sara Arthur: Malcolm McCulloch of the University of Western Australia in Perth (and his colleagues) put boxes around corals at Heron Island on the Great Barrier Reef and bubbled carbon dioxide into them, increasing acidity. Those corals were unaffected in a simulation of the acidity expected by 2100. Not that it will arrive, like the many dozens of prior failed predictions that make global warming soothsayers a laughing stock. Andreas Andersson of the Scripps Institution of Oceanography in San Diego, California, and his colleagues carefully monitored a coral reef in Bermuda for five years, and found that spikes in acidity were linked to increased reef growth. “At first we were really puzzled by this,” says Andersson. “It’s completely the opposite to what we would expect in an ocean-acidification scenario.” Phytoplankton blooms were washing in and feeding the corals, resulting in a higher growth rate and greater acidity levels in the water around the reef. Thriving, growing corals 'adidify' (make slightly less alkaline) the water around them.
Salmonofdoubt said:
The kids are being brainwashed to believe it's someone else's responsibility to fix things like climate change.
If they give up their phones, tablets, pcs or whatever else they use that will mean less electricity and natural resources are used. If they walk and cycle to places rather than get mummy or daddy to drive them that would reduce emissions. They could skip McDonald's and go vegan too.
Teaching kids that telling the government to fix things is wrong. If there's a problem you want solving you have to try and engage with the issue not ask someone else to sort it.
I agree that people need to take personal responsibility and anyone who campaigns for Government action on climate change whilst (particularly) still eating animal products is a massive hypocrite but solving climate change requires changes in Government policy, investment and focus as well as personal responsibility. If they give up their phones, tablets, pcs or whatever else they use that will mean less electricity and natural resources are used. If they walk and cycle to places rather than get mummy or daddy to drive them that would reduce emissions. They could skip McDonald's and go vegan too.
Teaching kids that telling the government to fix things is wrong. If there's a problem you want solving you have to try and engage with the issue not ask someone else to sort it.
Davos123 said:
Salmonofdoubt said:
The kids are being brainwashed to believe it's someone else's responsibility to fix things like climate change.
If they give up their phones, tablets, pcs or whatever else they use that will mean less electricity and natural resources are used. If they walk and cycle to places rather than get mummy or daddy to drive them that would reduce emissions. They could skip McDonald's and go vegan too.
Teaching kids that telling the government to fix things is wrong. If there's a problem you want solving you have to try and engage with the issue not ask someone else to sort it.
I agree that people need to take personal responsibility and anyone who campaigns for Government action on climate change whilst (particularly) still eating animal products is a massive hypocrite but solving climate change requires changes in Government policy, investment and focus as well as personal responsibility. If they give up their phones, tablets, pcs or whatever else they use that will mean less electricity and natural resources are used. If they walk and cycle to places rather than get mummy or daddy to drive them that would reduce emissions. They could skip McDonald's and go vegan too.
Teaching kids that telling the government to fix things is wrong. If there's a problem you want solving you have to try and engage with the issue not ask someone else to sort it.
People who campaign for something to be done about climate change complain about people who say there is no point in the UK doing anything because of the likes of China. But then use the same excuse why they personally shouldn't be making massive change's and sacrifices. "Their is no point in me giving my car, holidays abroad, big house, meat and so on, if no one else is going to". It's just completed hypocrisy.
Brainwashed kids being fed fear for the purposes of political agenda.
Poor blighters.
The problem of course, which is very much part of the political agenda, is that these kids will leave school and enter the work place full of this religious belief that humans are the primary/only cause of a changing climate - which is unleashing an impending catastrophe never seen before in the history of humanity. Whereby the only solution to this is to stop producing CO2.
This religious belief will filter to all walks of life and further feed the political agenda.
I do wonder though if this generation 'x' will be the ones who will live long enough to realise that after so many fruitless disaster predictions by the politicians, and realising that they are all living a steady happy uneventful life with zero occurrences of cities being submerged under 6ft of water, that the climate alarmist theory will finally be put to bed.
By that time of course the purveyors of this alarmist fear will be long gone 6ft under, with no criminal recourse to use to charge them for the hardship that they enforced on millions of people.
Poor blighters.
The problem of course, which is very much part of the political agenda, is that these kids will leave school and enter the work place full of this religious belief that humans are the primary/only cause of a changing climate - which is unleashing an impending catastrophe never seen before in the history of humanity. Whereby the only solution to this is to stop producing CO2.
This religious belief will filter to all walks of life and further feed the political agenda.
I do wonder though if this generation 'x' will be the ones who will live long enough to realise that after so many fruitless disaster predictions by the politicians, and realising that they are all living a steady happy uneventful life with zero occurrences of cities being submerged under 6ft of water, that the climate alarmist theory will finally be put to bed.
By that time of course the purveyors of this alarmist fear will be long gone 6ft under, with no criminal recourse to use to charge them for the hardship that they enforced on millions of people.
I live on the Banks of the River Dee on the Wirral. Twice a day the tide comes in and goes back out again. In the 16 years we have been here we have not seen any rise in tide height actually the opposite has occurred with tides not making the same heights as they once did. The only time that changes is when we have a storm and that has changed over the years the wind is definitely stronger now over the winter for more prolonged periods.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff